- Version
- Download 1
- File Size 365.86 KB
- File Count 1
- Create Date December 11, 2024
- Last Updated March 12, 2025
SENATE HANSARD 11 DECEMBER 2024 VOL 34 NO 17
PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE
Wednesday, 11th December, 2024
The Senate met at Half-past Two o’clock p.m.
PRAYERS
(THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE in the Chair)
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE
ADJUSTMENTS TO PARLIAMENTARY LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONS AND DELEGATIONS TO PARLIAMENTARY BODIES
THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE (HON. KAMBIZI): Hon. Members, pursuant to the meeting held by the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders on Friday, 6th December, 2024, I have to inform the Senate of the following adjustments to the Citizens Coalition for Change party (CCC) in parliamentary leadership Committee Chairpersons, Thematic Committee membership and delegations to Parliamentary bodies.
The CCC party in a letter dated 28th November, 2024 had advised of vacancies in the offices of:
- Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly
- Chief Whip in the National Assembly.
Consequently, in terms of Section of 151 (7) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the party advised the following appointments:
- Parliamentary Leadership
Hon. M. Kademaunga replaces Hon. L. Karenyi as the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly;
Hon. Sen. Mlotshwa is confirmed as the overall Chief Whip for the CCC party;
Hon. C. Moyo replaces Hon. E Mushoriwa as the CCC Chief Whip in the National Assembly;
Hon. Sen S. Chapfudza is appointed CCC party Deputy Chief Whip in the Senate.
Hon. S. Mdhluri - Committee on Indigenisation and Empowerment
Hon. Sen. Chief Dandawa – Committee member on HIV and AIDS
Parliamentary Delegation Association of Senates, Shoora and Equivalent Councils in Africa and the Arab World (ASSECAA), Hon. Sen. T. Kabondo, replaces Hon. Sen. M. Ngwena; Hon. R. Fanuel replaces Hon. Sen. Mupfumira.
MOTION
APPROVAL FOR RATIFICATION OF THE AGREEMENT ON CO-OPERATION SIGNED BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF ZIMBABWE AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Hon. President of Senate, I move the motion in my name that:
THAT WHEREAS Section 327 (2) (a) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe provides that any convention, treaty or agreement acceded to, concluded or executed by or under the authority of the President with one or more foreign states of Government or international organisations shall be subject to approval by Parliament;
WHEREAS the Ministry of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs of the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Ministry of Justice for the Russian Federation signed an Agreement on Cooperation on the 28th of June, 2024, at the Saint Petersburg International Legal Forum held in Saint Petersburg Russia.
WHEREAS the Republic of Zimbabwe is desirous of ratifying the aforesaid Agreement;
AND WHEREAS in terms of Article 12 of the Agreement, the entry into force of the aforesaid agreement shall be on the date of signature or if not signed simultaneously, on the date of last signature after all constitutional and internal processes have been completed;
NOW THEREFORE, in terms of Section 327 (2) (a) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, this House resolves that the aforesaid Agreement be and is hereby approved for ratification.
HON. SEN. PHULU: Thank you Hon. President of Senate, I would like to thank the Hon. Minister for bringing forward this agreement on cooperation between his ministry and the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. I have read through the agreement and have not found anything on the face of it which is acrimonious or runs counter to anything in our national Constitution. Certainly, perusing the agreement, I do not see anything that could be offensive to the fabric of the people of Zimbabwe and the manner in which our judicial system operate. In fact, I have found reading through the document without much explanation of course that they are a number of areas where the agreement proposes that they be cooperation and indeed taking into account that sometimes this form of cooperation can enhance the manner in which we do things. However, I am looking at Article 3, ‘areas of cooperation’, for example, formation and implementation of State policy in the sphere of justice.
How should the layman understand that, what does it mean, how do we cooperate with the Federation of Russia? In just a few examples from the Hon. Minister; what are they looking at? Ensuring the protection of legitimate interest rights and freedom to citizens on issues under the jurisdiction of the judicial authorities, that is very welcome. We know that when we have our people, our children travelling to work for Russia, we now know that the Hon. Minister is developing mechanisms of being in touch with that country so that he can protect our citizens and ensure that they receive justice and help in one way or the other and vice versa because we do have investors here and visitors, tourists who come from that country certainly developing a means of ensuring that mutual cooperation in these issues is very welcome.
Organising and enforcement of the obligation; this is clear. On number 5, on digitisation and implementation of artificial intelligence in the sphere of justice. Again, I would like to hear, I know that we have implemented within the judicial sector, we have gone paperless and we have a system that we imported. Will this improve on that regard or will this touch also on the judiciary or it is just the Ministry on its own. What are the cogent benefits that we are going to benefit? Of course, I know that we are going to get benefits, it is clear. If we could also get enlightenment, it is an interesting agreement.
Methodological support of legislation process and citing things but if the Hon. Minister could just unpack some of this. Development of the forensic system, again that is exciting. We know of course that their ministry, as they execute their duties, have to deal with a lot of forensic evidence and so forth, both in terms of white collar crime, murders and so forth. Against it will be interesting if the policy of the Government here would be reduced to a laymen because the document is very technical just in layman’s terms so that we can further appreciate what is being envisaged by the parties here.
However, having said this and after hopeful hearing from the Hon. Minister, I move to support the adoption of this agreement of International Cooperation. I thank you Hon. President.
THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE (: Thank you very much Hon. Senator Phulu, I recognise the Hon. Minister to shed light to the concerns raised.
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Mr. President Sir. I want to thank Hon. Senator Phulu for his comments where he supports the memorandum of agreement with the Russian Federation but seeks clarification on a few points and points to the Clause that speaks to policy formulation and indicates how this may be done. Mr. President the way the agreement was couched was in a general manner that will allow both parties to then sit down and say what the areas of interest are that we want to develop in our laws. It would be hazardous to give an example but it does not mean that we are saying there are discussions in that regard in terms of traffic management systems, obviously you sit down to come up with a policy on how you would want traffic to be managed.
From that policy you then enact legislation that will give effect to that policy. I would hazard to say if negotiations along those lines should they happen then both parties may then come up with a policy that will lead to the respective countries coming up with laws and systems that then govern that particular sector that they would have agreed upon. I would also speak about exchange of prisoners also to say that what then starts is to give each other guidelines. What exactly do we want if we are to exchange prisoners? Then we come up with a policy framework that would then be crystalised and we come up with laws that will then govern in how we do that. So if you look at the nature of the agreement, it is in a general way to say that we then develop areas of cooperation and have further agreements that then tie us. This is a general agreement that allows us as the two sister countries to cooperate in terms of legal matters.
It is the same with the area of digitization and artificial intelligence is very broad. We may wake up and believe that we need to enhance our systems and we learn lessons from them and then can come up with policies that will then be used to develop our justice system in terms of artificial intelligence. I believe it is an area that we can look at and we can also have even our deeds registry. We can have areas that we pick and ask how we can improve and how to find ways of signages with the way that our counterparts do. The agreement was couched in a manner that it will then allow us to unlock value in terms of the expertise that we have in our sister countries.
THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE: Thank you Hon. Minister for that clarification. Hon. Senator Phulu would have gone through the documents. Otherwise, it is important that when documents are posted on our gadgets, we need to go through them so that we are able to understand.
Motion put and agreed to.
MOTION
APPROVAL FOR RATIFICATION OF THE AFRICAN UNION CONVENTION ON CYBER SECURITY AND PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION
THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF INFORMATION COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY, POSTAL AND COURIER SERVICES (HON. D. PHUTI): I move the motion standing in my name that;
WHEREAS subsection (2) of section 327 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe provides that any Convention, Treaty or Agreement acceded to, concluded or executed by or under the authority of the President with one or more foreign states or governments or international organisations shall be subject to approval by the House of Senate.
WHEREAS the African Member States adopted the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection in June 2014 for the protection of society against cyber-crime especially by adopting appropriate legislation and fostering cross border co-operation.
AND WHEREAS the terms of the Convention requires that all Member Countries ratify the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection.
NOW THEREFORE, in terms of subsection (2) of section 327 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe this House resolves that the aforesaid convention be and is hereby approved for ratification.
Mr. President, Zimbabwe is in receipt of African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Data Protection Malabo Convention through the diplomatic channel and African Union adopted the Malabo convention in June 2014 in Malabo Equatorial Guinee. African States have acknowledged various African Diplomatic forums and the need to ratify the convention as soon as l possible within individual jurisdictions. Zimbabwe’s adoption of the Cyber and data protection Act [Chapter 2:7] in 2021 it is desirous that Zimbabwe ratify the convention so far to further the continental and consequently global collaborations in the fight against cyber security issues, cyber-crime and the protection of personal data on the continent.
Cyber security and especially cyber-crime is viewed as growing concern in Africa. The African Union Convention Cyber Security and Data Protection Malabo Convention was drafted in 2011 to establish a credible framework for cyber security in Africa through organisations of electronic transactions. Protection of personal data promotion of cyber security e-governance combating cyber-crime. The African Union postponed the adoption of the convention several times before finally adopting it in June 2014 in Malabo Equatorial Guinee. The Convention addresses three main areas number one the electronic transactions number two the personal data protection and number three the cyber security and cyber-crime. The convention’s main objective set out in the preamble is to pursue a common criminal policy aimed at protection of society against cyber-crime especially by enacting appropriate legislation and fostering cross border cooperation within which provisions have been captured locally in the cyber and data protection Act [Chapter 2:7] enacted in December 2021.
Mr. President the ratification of the 15th ratifying Mauritania on the 9th of May 2023 the Malabo Convention entered into force on 8th June 2023.
The Malabo Convention primarily focuses on the commitments of the African Union Member States to enact legislation on data protection and cyber security of which legislation is done. These commitments include but are not limited to the following: formal definitions of key concepts and data protection formalities applicable to data processing the status composition and organisation of national data protection authorities power and responsibilities assigned to these authorities. Principles governing data processing such as legitimacy, lawfulness, transparency, fairness, purpose, relevance, accuracy, confidentiality and security. Specific principles on the processing of sensitive data, data subjects right including information access objection and ratification.
Data controller obligations, adoption of national cyber security strategies policies legislation and regulations including the protection of criminal critical infrastructures. The establishment of legal framework for cybercrime and related offences. The promotion of cyber secure culture and the implementation of the cyber security governance and dispute settlement mechanism.
Mr. President as the member of the African Union in line with the adoption of the convention by the Heads of States in Malabo 2014 it is in the above context that the august House of Senate is hereby invited to approve the ratification of the Malabo Convention in furtherance of the greater cooperation in data protection and cyber security e-commerce on the continent. I thank you.
HON. SEN. PHULU: Thank you Mr. President. This is a motion which I do not think has had even three days on the Order Paper and yet the agreement is voluminous, 37 pages. I think that the Minister has moved with perhaps too much speed. In that short period of time, one can see that the convention is standard and involves many mentions. It respects human rights, affords rights to individuals, defines many things because the space of cyber is still new and there are very many hazy areas where our law might not know how to deal with certain things.
Legislators might not know what is best in terms of standard practice and cyber is very quick and covers the whole globe in a few seconds. So, one has to find a way to interconnect what is done in Zimbabwe, Botswana, Egypt and the USA in one transaction. So it is welcome that our Government is taking steps towards working with others in order to try and understand this space, formalise it, come up with rules and develop rules which are the basis upon which even this Parliament can make laws, taking into consideration the standardisation that the Government is striving for. Therefore, the convention that has been adopted by the 23rd Ordinary Session of the Assembly in Malabo in Equatorial Guinea on the 27th June, 2024 is welcome Mr. President and we would like to applaud the Minister for taking this huge step forward.
However, we would also want to hear whether the Ministry has also looked at this thing and compared it with clauses in our Constitution to see how well it measures up with our own domestic laws and to what extent it will enhance how we also craft our domestic laws. I also know that we have recently passed a number of pieces of legislation in this area of cyber - regulating how we use our own laws here. Is this not going to force us to rapidly change those laws or are those laws in fact in compliance with some of these clauses that we have in this convention? With those few words, I urge my colleagues to overwhelmingly ratify this convention which has been brought by the Minister. Thank you.
HON. PHUTHI: I would like to thank Hon. Senator Phulu for having gone through the convention and making contributions related to what he observed. First of all, I would like to take note of the concern that I read with speed. I apologise for that style of presentation but I pray that it has been understood.
Hon. Senator Phulu observed that the speed of cyber is very detrimental whilst cyber itself is meant for good use. A very important observation indeed which gives reason to why we have brought this for ratification. Cooperation in the area of cybersecurity and data protection is no longer an option. The world is now cyber, it is now the new currency. As such, Zimbabwe cannot be left out when the world, at whichever level, in this case continental, as we are talking about the Malabo Convention of the Malabo in Equatorial Guinea. As we may observe, there are a lot of key takeaways that are meant to benefit Zimbabwe as a member state of the African Union in terms of cooperation in this area of cybersecurity.
Today’s war is more critical to those who have invested their mind and time to recognition of the role of cybersecurity in the world. My response is to highlight the importance of cybersecurity and taking note of Hon. Senator Phulu’s comment that cyber and its speed needs us to be thorough. I would like to appreciate that he has exalted the Ministry for managing to bring this convention this far, highlighting its importance in terms of the last member signing on the 8th June last year, making it a declaration that gives us and other member countries to follow suit.
Hon. Senator Phulu made mention of domestic laws and highlighted issues of concern on whether or not this convention is in tandem with our domestic laws. That answer will be very brief for me. Yes, Mr. President, it is. I would like to conclude by responding to his observation on the importance of regularly checking the relevance of our legislation on cybersecurity issues to find out whether they are still within means or not as we know that the area of information communication technology will move and change faster than we can do our laws.
Fortunately, we are still very safe. It is only the Cyber and Data Protection Act that we have managed to bring to force, acceded to law by the end of the year 2021. We are still, however, observing the need to look at the Electronic Transactions Bill and a lot of other Bills to deal with the telecommunications sector in order to modernise the legislation. Otherwise, in terms of legislations existing so far under the space of information communication technology, we are still on the reels. I thank you.
THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE: Thank you very much Hon. Minister for that clarification.
Motion put and agreed to.
SECOND READING
DEATH PENALTY ABOLITION BILL [H. B. 5A, 2024]
Third Order read: Second Reading: Death Penalty Abolition Bill [H. B. 5A, 2024].
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): I rise to deliver my Second Reading speech on the Death Penalty Abolition Bill [H.B. 5A, 2024]. Mr. President, I stand before this House to seek the abolition of the death penalty. The deliberation will be emotional. We are called as individuals to listen. We are called to individually and collectively examine the Bill as it is a matter that touches the right to life of individuals. Not of this or that other human being but as part of human being whose crimes are such of a heinous nature that our society is called to legislate – that they must die if found guilty by the court of law.
Almost all cultures in Zimbabwe have marked out certain crimes to be deserving capital punishment. Our indigenous culture had less problems and messier than any foreign culture. The deserving of death has been perceived to be inhuman, you and me must still act with divulsion with some of the execution we hear about. Some of them are carried out in the very countries that take it upon themselves to lecture to others about human rights. Mr. President, executing a human being is a method that is used in farms to youthenise pigs for human consumption yet such a method of execution has been legislated or practiced in two states of the United States that I am aware of.
Mr. President Sir, in 2015, in the State of Yokohama passed a law to allow all nitrogen gas poisoning or nitrogen induced hypoxia as a method of execution following difficulties in obtaining the drugs necessary for lethal injection. In January this year, Alabama, a United State with 165 people on death roll, carried out the first ever execution by nitrogen hypoxia.
The convict in question was killed through an experimental technique that pumps pure nitrogen gas into a person’s lungs instead of the regular air that has oxygen humans need to breathe. Not long before this Mr. President, in 2020, the American Veterinary Medical Association issued guidelines for the anastacia of animals in which it recommended giving animals including pigs, a sedative before they are youthenised by means of nitrogen hypoxia.
The Alabama authorities did not even follow this recommendation when it smothered the awake and alert convict with nitrogen and they still have 165 prisoners left to execute. Mr. President Sir, I am not here to advocate for mercy for murderers on death roll, I am here to plead with you in the name of humanity that they can be punished harshly in ways that do not stain our dignity as human beings since it is foreign to us.
Culturally and historically, before colonisers came to our country, we had no death penalty. In vernacular, we would say ‘Mushonga wengozi kuiripa, kwete kuuraya’. Our culture does not allow us to kill someone because they have murdered someone. In Shona we would say, ‘Ngozi inoripwa’. That is the point that I am trying to put across Mr. President.
We believed that if one kills another, the spirit of the deceased would avenge for their death. I will not rehearse to you in detail all the grounds commonly put forward for the abolition of the death penalty, suffice for me to list some of these grounds as follows;
Firstly, it is inhumane. I do not want to judge other countries Mr. President, that applied the death penalty but I ask you Honourable Senators to recall when did we last execute anyone? Can anyone even remember? Many of us advocate for the death penalty but I assure you, there is hardly a person in our country who would seek a job as a professional executioner no matter how high the reward can be.
Secondly, it inflicts psychological torment, not only on the person to be executed but often, even on the people involved somehow with execution.
His Excellency, our President, Dr. Mnangagwa said that upon execution of the comrades who were on death roll, they were given a wheelbarrow with their comrade and told to burry him then plant a lawn on top, irrigate it so that it would grow. Imagine the psychological trauma that they went through. This is the reason why we are saying; why as a nation do we need such an inhuman treatment to others?
His Excellency was once on death roll and he told this gruelling story to us. To say that when he was at Harare Central Prison, they would randomly come to pick his colleagues for execution and nobody would know when it would be his turn. Once they had killed one comrade, they would then take out one prisoner under death row and give him the body and say go and dig on the court yard of Harare Prison, bury him and plant lawn on top and irrigate. That is what was happening.
Not only that Mr. President some of the crimes that attract death penalty like treason, the majority of those that we now call our heroes and are laid to rest at the National Shrine where candidates for trial as treasonous people but to us they were heroes. Not only that Mr. President, if our current Head of State was executed, imagine the contribution that he is making to this country. I urge the Hon. Senators that in our laws, we do not need this we would have alternative sentences.
Thirdly, Mr. President, it is an open question whether the death penalty actually deters crimes or not. We have had the death penalty for a long time and nobody would say that since we have had the death penalty on our statute books, we have reduced the number of people who commit murder in aggravating circumstances or terrorists. It does not deter. It is actually a question that is debatable and studies that have been carried out Mr. President Sir, have indicated that in all jurisdictions where the death penalty is carried out, there is no reduction in crime. The actual number of murders is still the same even with the death penalty. So, the question that is being asked is, why are we saying it is a deterrent when we are not seeing the deterrence of imposing the death penalty? Mr. President, it also does not address the root cause of crime and it is biased against people experiencing poverty.
Mr. President, history will tell you that the majority of people that have been executed are those in a struggle or in poverty. It is biased against those that society must protect. Even in our country Mr. President Sir, the death penalty has a racial bias. When was the last time a white person executed in our country? If I am not mistaken Mr. President, the last white person actually sentenced to death and awaiting eminent execution cheated the hangman by committing suicide in death row in 1978.
Last, Mr. President, let us not forget that the death penalty is irreversible. Our police, prosecutors, judges and witnesses are human beings who make mistakes. Once someone has been executed and when you realise that there was a mistake, you cannot restore the life back. How would you then feel if evidence later revealed that a hanged person had been framed by an adversary? It does not happen often but if it does, we cannot bring back the life of the innocent person.
In conclusion Mr. President Sir, let me emphasise a point I made earlier namely that while our people may in principle favour the death penalty, for extreme crimes in practice, they are hesitant to see it carried out as shown by the fact that we have more than 60 prisoners on death row as we speak and some of them have been awaiting for years to be executed. In fact, we last executed in 2005 and we are now in 2024 and it is 19 years, we have not executed anyone. Our judges are human so even if they find that a crime has been committed in aggravating circumstances, they prefer to sentence the offender to 20 years or life in prison instead. I submit Mr. President.
HON. SEN. TONGOGARA: Thank you for awarding me the opportunity to rise and contribute to the debate on the Death Penalty Abolition Bill [H. B. 5, 2023], a landmark piece of legislation that seeks to fundamentally transform Zimbabwe’s criminal justice system. This Bill, reflective of a growing global movement towards the abolition of capital punishment, demands our attention as legislators entrusted with the mandate to uphold justice, preserve human dignity and ensure that our legal framework aligns with the contemporary human right standard.
Mr. President, the right to like is the cornerstone of all human rights and is enshrined in Section 48 of our Constitution. The death penalty, as the ultimate and irreversible punishment, contravenes this sacred principle. By abolishing it, Zimbabwe reaffirms the commitment to respecting the sanctity of human life and the inherent dignity of every individual, regardless of their transgressions.
Furthermore, no justice system is infallible. History has revealed instances where innocent individuals have been wrongfully convicted and executed. Once carried out, the death penalty offers no room for rectification. By replacing it with life imprisonment, we safeguard against such irreversible miscarriages of justice.
Moreover, the administration of the death penalty is resource-intensive. Legal processes in capital cases – from prolonged trials to appeals and maintenance of death row facilities – place a significant financial burden on the State. Abolishing the death penalty redirects these resources towards rehabilitation programmes, victim support and enhancing the overall efficiency of the justice system. Globally, 112 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes and 142 are abolitionist in law or practice. By joining this growing majority, Zimbabwe strengthens its position as a progressive nation committed to human rights and justice. Neighbouring countries such as Mozambique and Namibia have long abolished the death penalty, demonstrating that societies can thrive without resorting to capital punishment. Allow me to highlight some countries where the abolition of the death penalty has yielded positive outcomes.
Rwanda, after the genocide abolished the death penalty in 2007, focusing on restorative justice. This decision played a pivotal role in fostering reconciliation and rebuilding the nation. South Africa since abolished the death penalty in 1995 and has seen its Constitutional Court emerge as a beacon of human rights protection in Africa, emphasising rehabilitation over retribution. Germany abolished in 1949, laid the groundwork for justice system centered on rehabilitation, with significantly lower crime rates than countries retaining capital punishment.
These examples underscore that justice systems prioritising human dignity and rehabilitation can foster safer, more cohesive societies. While some argue that the death penalty serves as a deterrent, research consistently challenges this assumption. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) reports that there is no conclusive evidence linking the death penalty to reduced crime rates. Conversely, countries with abolitionist policies have often reported declines in violent crime. In Zimbabwe, the rate of brutal murders remains a significant concern. According to Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) statistics, 1642 murder cases were recorded in 2023.
These numbers underscore the urgent need for effective crime prevention strategies rooted in community policing, social reforms and addressing socio-economic disparities rather than punitive measures that fail to address underlying causes. Critics of the death penalty rightly point out its roots in colonial era legal frameworks, alien to our traditional values. Zimbabwean customary law emphasises restitution and reconciliation over punitive measures. The Bill, therefore, represents a return to our cultural ethos while embracing modern justice principles.
Moreover, the discriminatory application of the death penalty, as highlighted during public consultations, cannot be ignored. Section 48 of the Constitution exempts women and individuals over 70 years from capital punishment, raising questions about fairness and equity. Abolishing it entirely ensures a uniform application of justice for all citizens. The death penalty Abolition bill [H. B. 5, 2023] is not merely a legislative reform. It is a moral and philosophical statement about the kind of society we aspire to rebuild. A society where justice is tempered with mercy, where human society dignity is upheld and where the state`s role is not to take life but to protect it.
As we deliberate on this Bill, let us draw inspiration from His Excellency, President E. D. Mnangagwa, a longstanding advocate for the abolition of capital punishment. Let us also consider the voices of the 866 citizens who participated in public consultations, the majority of whom supported abolition. By passing the Bill, Zimbabwe takes a bold step towards a more humane and just society, setting an example for the region and the world. Let us as Senators, seize this opportunity to leave an indelible legacy of compassion, progress and justice for future generations. I urge this august House to support the Death Penalty Abolition Bill unequivocally. Let us consign capital punishment to the annals of history and embrace a justice that truly embodies the values of our Constitution. I thank you.
HON. SEN. L. SIBANDA: Thank you Mr. President. I rise with a heavy heart. Being a woman, a mother, a citizen and at the same time a Senator of this country who has got a cousin who is lying in the mortuary right now, whom we have been looking for, for about two weeks now, who was found dead at Fig Tree, Hilary Muleya, who was murdered by a person who we do not know even up to today. I am here to serve my time in the Senate these coming two days and in three days’ time, I will go and bury him.
Mr. President Sir, there are people who have been going out there killing people, our relatives, children and our parents. Two days ago, there was something we read about in the media. Someone went and tied the door of a hut with people sleeping inside and torched it. Those are the same people that we are supposed to forgive as a nation. I am a law abiding citizen of this country. I am grateful that we have got a President who was spared from the death penalty. I am a citizen of this country who abides by the law that we abolish the death penalty.
Mr. President Sir, we remember Geneva Sibanda who was murdered by his gardener and his wife. We remember a lot of our friends, colleagues, even amongst us who have been murdered by people who are roaming the streets now. Some are known and some are not known, some are in prison and they brag about killing those people that they have killed. It is so painful in our hearts even if we say that sentencing these people to death does not serve our country anything or just killing them like pigs does not matter to us.
Mr. President Sir, people will die, people will be killed by people that we show remorse to, who do not even show remorse to us. It is so painful that I stand here to defend the same people who will go out there and kill their grandparents, who will go out there and kill their mothers for lack of food in the evening because there was no food to cook for dinner but they will carry on and go and kill them just because the mother failed to get anything to cook or to put on the table for their meals.
Mr. President Sir, it is so painful to just spare a murderer who does not even show any remorse to a helpless young lady on the streets who just knocked off from work and they are walking home and someone snatches their bag. When they realise they have seen them, they kill them just for the sake of saving themselves from being identified as a bag snatcher. He does not care about tomorrow but puts a knife in their heart to kill them just to save themselves.
Mr. President Sir, there is so much hurt out there for those murderers that we still want to defend as a country and we will keep them in our prisons for years just to save them from death while they do not even care for this nation. I can say a lot about the abolition of the death penalty. Thank you Mr. President.
THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE: Thank you very much Hon. Senator Sibanda. As earlier alluded to by the presenter of this motion, emotions will rise but by the end of the day, let us debate and come up with what we can.
*HON. SEN. CHIEF CHARUMBIRA: Thank you Hon. President of the Senate. I am quite unfortunate to debate after the emotional debate presented by the previous Senator.
I stood up Hon. President, to talk about things that have a history which did not start today. Hon. Minister, we were wondering why the Bill was taking long to be brought to this august House. This issue has been pending for so many years in the past Parliaments. In the past, this issue was discussed in this august House and firstly it is a very emotional issue. We do not want people who murder people or commit crimes but when crafting laws, we need to look at where laws lie.
As chiefs, we have done a lot of workshops and I believe the Minister is aware. We have asked Ndau chiefs whether people are killed when they commit offences and they said no, then we asked in other different cultures in Manicaland, Nyanga, Buhera and different chiefs. We went to the Shanganis, we went to Mwenezi and we consulted them about how people are punished after committing murder and other crimes.
In Matabeleland we went to Binga, we went to Mashonaland and we went to different parts of the country. We then had a national conference of chiefs where all chiefs were present and this issue was tabled before them. All chiefs agreed that there is no culture which permits the killing of an offender. In our culture as black people, there is no culture which says that an offender should be killed.
As I stand here, I want to say indeed Hon. Minister, the killing of an offender is not part of our culture and indeed, we support you as we stand on our culture, as we rely on our Zimbabwean culture, the African culture and the regional culture. This is a law which does not exist in our cultures. I want to challenge anyone who says that he or she is a lawyer, to go and study law so that they trace the origins of the death penalty and how it came about.
In Zimbabwe, there was a war in 1896, the Shona and Ndebele uprisings against the colonial settlers. We all know about these wars. All tribes united to fight the white colonialists. I will not repeat that part but I want to focus on the aspect that there are people who were taken when a lot of white men were killed. We had managed to overcome the whites and there were reinforcements from the Queen. They sent soldiers through Beira and Botswana to reinforce the force and they subdued the people.
Most chiefs were leaders and the white men then said that there are people who murdered the whites. They said that in Matabeleland and Mashonaland there were quite a number of people who had murdered the whites, then there was Mbuya Nehanda who was known to be instrumental in that particular war. We have the literature. They said, what are we going to do about these people who have killed the white people? They did not have any way of punishing them. They had a problem because they did not have a specific law. In 1896, the war ended. Then in 1897, this law was introduced in order to punish the offenders by the Commissioner who was in charge of Rhodesia, who was based in the Cape Town. Alfred Milner, the Minister was in charge of South Africa as well as our country that responded saying that in order to deal with the people who led the war, with immediate effect, the law must apply the Roman Dutch Law.
The Roman Dutch Law had no referendum in this country. It just came and was applied by Alfred Milner as an individual in 1898. He said that law must apply and we will deal with all the criminals that led that war using the Roman Dutch Law, based on Western Criminal Jurisprudence. This is a quote that I have made that we will use the Western Criminal Jurisprudence which allowed capital punishment.
Because of Alfred Milner’s decree, he brought the Roman Dutch Law. This is the law which was applied in the murdering or the hanging of Mbuya Nehanda. Alfred Milner alone determined the introduction of that law. I am saying this is not our law. The law was imposed upon us because we had overcome colonialism. This is a colonial law which we cannot continue having but we will be promoting Alfred Milner who is not part of us.
The other thing Minister is that you brought this law today, unlike the other laws that come. This law comes based on our values and culture as Zimbabweans. I believe that if most laws will come considering our values as Africans and Zimbabweans, this is based on our culture. It does not matter what other cultures do, Australians, Americans and other nationalities. Americans are people who have that spirit of killing others. That is why you would find that there are a lot of issues there. You will find a 12-year old shooting and killing 50 people. This has never happened in Zimbabwe. These are spiritual issues where you find them having capital and corporal punishment.
Life imprisonment is painful. People should be incarcerated for life in order to feel the pain. You know jail life. I want to support you Hon. Minister because you mentioned that sometimes there can be miscarriage of justice whereby someone is mistakenly condemned to death. For example, in China, someone went missing and after years, it was said he was killed by so and so who was with him at the bar. A case was done and it went through the courts. Someone was charged. Then after 20 years, after someone had been executed, the person who was said to be killed came back saying they were in the Philippines. Despite that someone was executed, this person was still alive. These are loopholes that happen.
Today, the President is alive and this is a big lesson. He could have been killed during the colonial era. God is the only one who has vengeance. Therefore, capital punishment is not right. We might put someone on the death roll who might emerge later as a leader. I believe that there should be life imprisonment. No-one has the authority to kill anyone. In the Ten Commandments from the Bible, we are told that we must not kill. The Bible says ‘do not kill’ and there is no exception. There is no justification. As human beings, we cannot have exceptions. I thank you Mr. President Sir.
THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF SENATE: Thank you Hon. Charumbira. Next time, when you give an example of an Honourable Member like Hon. Senator Phulu, please say Hon. Phulu.
*HON. SEN. MAVENYENGWA: Thank you President of Senate for the opportunity that you gave me to add my voice to the Bill that was brought by the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. The issue of capital punishment and the issue of execution, I have heard a lot of people talking and I concur with most the contributions that have been made. I want to add a few words and start by thanking the Hon. Minister for bringing this Bill to this august House. The Bill, indeed speaks to an emotional issue, especially when someone is guilty of murder. Murder is not an easy issue because he would have taken away breath from another human being.
When someone dies, they do not come back even though we say that there should be appeasement of the person’s spirit. The person would be dead and they do not come back. We have a lot of issues that we have seen that we have experienced, for example, the killing of young children like Tapiwa Makore which was quite sad and many more. I am happy that when the chief spoke, he talked about issues we find even in the Bible, the Word of God, which specifies that no one has the power to kill except God who has vengeance.
For those who read the Bible, when Jesus came, he said that killing is not right. It should not be done. He gave an example of a woman who was accused of committing adultery. He said that if anyone is free from any sin, then they should cast the first stone. The Bible does not allow capital punishment in that regard. Even when the chief spoke, he clarified about the cultural issues.
The other thing is that when someone is accused of committing a sin or an offence, we find some people being falsely accused. You will find cases where there are alleged rape cases but you would find that maybe the accused does not have a good relationship with the mother of the child and someone can be framed. They can serve in jail despite being innocent. We have witnessed it in Masvingo. A daughter-in-law coached her daughter to accuse her father-in-law. When the case went through the courts, it was proved that the child was coached and the mother had framed her father in-law. It is possible for people to frame others so that they are convicted of a murder charge, which might not necessarily have transpired and later you would find that the person would be acquitted even after being hanged.
Mr. President, I believe that when someone has committed an offence and they are convicted for life in prison, when they serve for the rest of their life in prison, that person would suffer more than the one who would have been executed. So, if a person serves for so many years in jail, that person would really feel the pain of being in jail. I believe our Chiefs will also look at the case the traditional way where compensation to the family of the deceased is done in a cultural way whilst the offender serves life imprisonment. So, I agree with the Hon. Minister that death penalty do not prohibit people from committing similar offences because of these judgments. There are a number of reasons why that happen, sometimes someone would be possessed at that particular moment of committing the crime or they act irrationally or emotionally. There are incidences that may cause people to overreact and commit these murder cases, for example, you might be coming from work and find your wife in a compromising position with someone. Because of anger you might overreact and commit murder and then you would be given the death penalty. Killing is not something which is normally premeditated, no one comes from home to say that I want to kill but there are circumstances surrounding these issues which should also be looked into when dealing with such cases. You will find the person regretting after committing murder and having remorse over the act.
I agree with the Hon. Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs that the death penalty should be abolished. In 1983 in Texas, there was a man who was called Carlos Dohan who was given a death sentence in 1989 after being convicted in 1983 and after his execution it was discovered that it was a case of mistaken identities but this person had been executed despite the mistaken identity.
In rural areas we have people who are suffering and cannot afford a lawyer to represent them in the event that they have committed a crime. They are given state lawyers who might not be able to deal with the matter properly because they are not motivated by anything unlike a private lawyer, hence they can be convicted for failure of proper representation even if they would have not committed the crime. Whereas someone who would have committed murder and would afford to have a lawyer who can help to defend the matter and find a loophole and win the case. Some of these laws will be a disadvantage to the poor – you will find cases being postponed and going through different processes. With these few words and the pain that I feel that people kill others, I believe that the death penalty be abolished and have punitive alternatives which are not the death penalty. I thank you.
HON. SEN. C. MUTSVANGWA: Thank you Hon. President, I want from the onset to applaud the Minister for coming before this august Senate with these very important yet emotional issues of the repeal of the Death Penalty Act. He has argued his case well, he has used evidence from across the globe. Along the way, the Hon. Minister has given us rueful accounts of the experience of our President, His Excellency, Cde. Dr. E. D. Mnangagwa when he spent 10 years at death row. This is a case study at a personal level of somebody who faced the prospect of death at the hands of the State.
Our President has long argued against the death penalty even in the former Government of the First Republic when the sentiments were clearly not in accordance with his views, he stood his ground. The passage of time across the globe has shown that the stance which our President took has gained momentum and Hon. Sen. Tongogara has presented the aspects of the global conscience against the death penalty very, very cogently and very passionately.
I think, it is only proper that with the clear mind of our head of State among many other issues, we give him favour of judgement on this particular issue and accord him with the gift that the Senate of Zimbabwe has endorsed his long held views against the heinous state crime of the death penalty. On that score I strongly support the stance of the Hon. Minister of Justice.
I also want to underpin what has been said by our Hon. Senator Chief Charumbira, the issue of the death penalty by the State owes more into the abuse of the State against individuals when there is conflict over materials things like land. The Roman Dutch Law which he speaks about, speaks of white people coming to South Africa in 1652 and waging continuous wars against the Xhosas, Ngunis and all the other Fengu people and other tribes of South Africa over an extended period of time.
In order to scare those who were resisting the plunder of their lands, the death penalty was introduced and it came to Rhodesia under similar circumstances. So maybe today we have a very sane Government but we are not assured that it is always the case. In future this law may come to haunt us when a dictator or a tyrant takes over and uses that law for political purposes.
The case in point is America and people have cited white cases but the most outstanding cases of abuse of the death penalty are against blacks by the American government which feels that the blacks should be hunted down and their population reduced and there whitened and this is a matter of history in America. So we want to belong to those civilised states, even with the pain caused when somebody is killed, the death penalty is more emotional as a remedy. It is not scientific as a remedy. So the emotions of a particular murder carry the day but there are not necessarily in accordance with justice which even the Bible says ‘do not take life regardless of who you are’. Let us leave that to God, states should not take lives of other people for whatever crimes.
On that note, I want to say Hon. President you are in good stead with this House if you can convince this Senate to support the Bill of the Hon. Minister. I thank you.
HON. SEN. DR. CHIEF NGUNGUMBANE: Thank you Hon. President, I rise to support the Bill as brought by the Hon. Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. I am particularly impressed by the approach that he used in moving or asking the Senate to abolish the death penalty, our practice as Africans. I think Hon. Minister we need to applaud you for having taken that stance, we are Africans and we will always remain Africans in this regard. I so move Hon. President that we support the Hon. Minister.
Allow me to say a few words, most of the things that I wanted to mention have been disposed of by my fellow colleagues. First and foremost, this issue of the death penalty was introduced by the British Colonial Administrators in Zimbabwe as alluded to by various speakers having come to the Cape of Good Hope in 1652 and it spreads its roots to Southern Africa and beyond.
This has left imprints on the Zimbabwean Criminal Justice System, 44 years after independence. One of those issues is the issue of the death penalty. Hon. Minister, I applaud you when you talk of our culture, our custom and our practices. Allow me Hon. President to use the philosophy of Ubuntu in support to what my Minister has alluded to. In 1980, when we attained independence, there was one philosopher not the so-called Europeans or Americans as with our education system that we believe those academics, those scholars that have written books coming from that geographical location. It is a result of those people that most our education system is biased, construed towards the West because it is giving a perspective of the West.
Allow me to quote Samkange and Samkange 1980, our own local person coming from Mashonaland West. He denotes about 3 maxims, one about humanity, secondly sanctity of life and people centred leadership. I will ignore the first one and the third one and go to the second one. Samkange notes that if and one is faced with a decisive choice between wealth and the preservation of another human being, then one should opt for the preservation of life. This is what defines ubuntu. Life is sacrosanct, you do not just kill for the sake of killing. Allow me Hon. President to borrow from a foreign law, case law, I know it is persuasive in nature. It brought a significant change in the South African jurisprudence.
The case involving Makwanyana and another decided in the Constitutional Court of South Africa in 1995. The late judge Yvonne Makgoro, she is late but there is a constitutional judge, she used write books on humanity, hunhu, ubuntu. In a majority the judgement, she noted that life is sacrosanct, we cannot kill another person because they have killed. By then South Africa was grappling with a problem of violence, death as perpetuated by the colonial system. The court in its wisdom agreed that we are going to use ubuntu to abolish the death penalty because ubuntu underpins certain fundamental rights found in the Bill of Rights of the South African Constitution, which are those and not limited to right to dignity, right to life and right not to be tortured.
So, it is in this same vain Hon. President that we support that this Bill looking at our own traditions, we should not go far. Local problems require local solution, the solution is with us Mr. President, and killing as alluded, will not bring back the life of the deceased. To kill, you are not going to solve the problem because in our African set up, killing or conflict between me and my other colleague is a conflict between two families. So it requires both families to sit down and agree and resolve that conflict. So, sending one to the gallows will not solve that problem. That conflict between the two families will continue to exist for a time to come.
Mr. President, the death penalty is retributive as I have alluded to and to what other speakers have said. In support of this Bill, allow me to say the death penalty is at the discretion of the Judge. To me, it can be imposed in an unfairly and discriminatory nature. Section 48 provides that the death penalty must not be imposed on the following persons: someone less than 21 years when crime or offence took place, who is more than 70 years old and must not be carried out on a woman and we have Section 56 that calls for unfair discrimination.
This clause Mr. President, the death penalty to me was discriminatory. The implication was that people falling under the category of 21 years and below and those 70 and above were not capable of committing crimes that deserved a death penalty. That is discriminatory, to say women in that regard cannot or are incapable of committing crimes that would require the death penalty. This violates Section 56 and we want equality Hon. Minister. If this is removed - a crime is a crime regardless of who has committed that crime as long as that individual had mental capacity to commit those crimes.
Finally, I support the abolition of the death penalty because our criminal justice system in this country and beyond is not 100% effective. Judges and other presiding officers are human beings. When the police do their investigation, the prosecutors are there to make mistakes and at times these mistakes as alluded to colleagues, are rectified when somebody has been sent to the gallows. I think Hon. President through the Minister, it is imperative that we engage in more research to ensure that people are not given sentences for crimes that they have not committed.
To those that are on death row Hon. President, it is very painful to know as alluded by Senator Mutsvangwa that the President was on death row. If you hear foot-steps of people coming to your cell, that is mental torture. The worst torture that one can come across and former Justice Gubbay once remarked and said that when somebody is put in jail, a prisoner does not forfeit all or his liberties upon imprisonment. These liberties include the right not to be tortured, right to life among others. With those few words Mr. President, I rise to support the abolition of the death penalty.
+HON. SEN. NDLOVU: Thank you Mr. President. I want to honor those who spoke before my contribution and I also want to thank the Minister of Justice who brought this Bill to the august House, which is quite painful. People are murderers but what is worse is that killing someone is not a blessing, it is a curse. It is very painful. We are coming from war, we liberated this nation in 1980 and a man died in a way of liberating ourselves. That is why you realised that the President of this country does not like the death sentence or execution because the President went through that.
I also know someone named John Maluzo who was sentenced to execution, he went to the gallows and bid farewell to his relatives. When he went to the gallows, the machine jammed and they removed him. Then they asked what had happened, meaning that his ancestral spirits hade declined. We also had another man called Bhebhe who was sentenced to death. He was executed, it brought a lot of tension and pain in the village but there was nothing the community could do because that was the law that time. This is why the Minister of Justice has brough this motion that the law should be repealed, I support it fully. Let there be a way which is not about killing someone but making someone be sentenced. Our nation has a lot of natural resources and we see a number of people coming with weapons. We are asking the Minister that we should enact a law that dissuades people from wilfully killing each other.
Mr. President, Zimbabwe is one of the most peaceful nations but there are some criminals or murderers around. The Minister of Justice should implement laws that will make people respect each other. It will be better if people are given long sentences in prison and when they are released, they will find that they will not have homes because they will have acted recklessly. I was reading on social media yesterday where one person was sentenced for nine to10 years in prison and when he came back, he found that his wife was now married to another person and people started laughing at him. So, he has to start a new life after prison.
Killing someone is painful but once you revenge by killing, you are not doing any good. Hence, it is important that we should support this law as has been brought by the Minister of Justice that people should not face the death sentence because they have killed. It should not be a way that since people are no longer being sentenced to execution, then they should just kill other people lawlessly. Whether it is in the mining sector or GBV, people should be sentenced to 50 or more years.
There are some issues regarding the use of machetes but we are appealing that we should have strong laws. These people who are coming to mine in our country should not be allowed to carry around dangerous weapons. With these few words, I support the motion by the Minister of Justice even though the motion came late. I thank you.
+HON. SEN. PHULU: Thank you Mr. President and I also want to second the motion by the Minister of Justice on revoking the death penalty of those people who would have committed murder. Our Constitution in Section 68 is very clear that every person has the right to life. The people of Zimbabwe were asked in 2013 on how they would want the Government to treat criminals who commit murder and people said these murderers should be taken to jail.
However, when it came to the death sentence, the nation was divided into two. They gave a lot of factors or reasons such as given by Hon. Senator Sibanda. He spoke very well that there are some criminals within the nation who walk around the streets but to such people, death sentence is not an option. As I was saying, it is also difficult to oppose the view of someone who was so emotive, almost crying because of feelings but the question is - does executing someone lower the level of criminality in Zimbabwe? We had the death sentence for a number of years but has it reduced the number of criminals in the country?
The chiefs have said that traditionally there were some ways of taking care of these criminals. There were all types of criminals but the traditional leaders had a way of taking care of these criminals and the criminals were very few by then but since the inception of the Dutch Law, we have realised that we have high levels of killing or murdering and this will continue. We are appealing to the Minister that he should analyse and assess other ways of reducing murder cases and also to prevent these from happening. The killers should be sentenced to a long time in prison.
If you read newspapers, you will find that some are killing their children because they have failed to provide food and some because the wife has not ironed his clothes. We should find out why people are behaving in such a way. Is it because we are not taking seriously the issue of life as a community because our children are watching videos of wars from the gadgets? If our children are going to grow up without cherishing the importance of life, it will be so easy for them to kill each other. On Section 48 on the right to life, the people of Zimbabwe realised that it is also important that everyone has the right to live. Let us respect the right to life, and they mentioned that.
People also said those who are murderers, it was agreed to have the death penalty. If we go back, the law was different because it was said if you have killed someone, it was definite that you were going to face the death sentence. The murderer would be asked to explain why he should not be executed and they would explain the reasons. If the judge could not find a reasonable factor to pardon you, he was supposed to sentence you to death. This time we have realised that if your murder case is of aggravating circumstances, then that person is the one who is to be sentenced to death. This shows that the people of Zimbabwe were going backwards in terms of the death sentence. However, Parliament was given an option to enact or draft a law supporting the death sentence or not. The Constitution mandated Parliament to analyse and assess this death penalty.
Secondly, according to our Constitution, death sentence cannot be executed on anyone who is below 21 years or anyone who is above 70 years. Women also cannot be sentenced to death. We are saying there are a few that are left, those withing the age of 22 years and 69 years.
The Hon. Minister by bringing this motion to this august House is making it equal for everyone, that there is no one who will not face death sentence. It is a short motion and it also speaks volumes. If the Hon. Minister can explain to us with regards to members of the armed forces who have been sentenced to death, are they also included in this Act?
I want to support this motion and request other Hon. Members to support this motion also. I want to thank the Hon. Minister and Hon. Mushoriwa who have moved this Bill to be brought to the Senate. Let us pass this Bill in our numbers. I thank you.
+HON. SEN. S. MOYO: Thank you Mr. President Sir for giving me this opportunity to also add my voice. I also thank Hon. Z. Ziyambi the Minister for Justice legal and Parliamentary Affairs for bringing up certain things that we have heard and some that we have seen happening. I know some Hon. Members are looking at their time to say it is time for us to go.
However, I feel it is of importance for me to also add my voice, for, if I do not do so, I feel I would have failed the people that I represent. This motion touches a very sensitive issue. I know way back it was practice that if you murder someone, you would be sentenced to life in prison. I remember in 1985, during Gukurahundi, there were so many people who got victimised – for example, there is a couple that was arrested when they were trying to establish the whereabouts of my uncle, he then came in the open to tell them that they were not supposed to arrest that couple for he is the one who was there and who witnessed everything that happened.
My uncle was given a death sentence and unfortunately, he was promoted to glory. When we look at the causes of Gukurahundi, we would realise that my uncle died an innocent death. He was not fully participating in Gukurahundi but unfortunately, he served a sentence for something that he did not do.
I agree with the Hon. Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs in saying that there are some people who were serving jail sentences for things that they did not do. It may take us the whole day in trying to debate this. We know even now that we have so many people who are murderers. We therefore urge the Hon. Minister to have a look at this issue to say, why are these murderers doing this.
If we are to implement the death penalty as highlighted by the Hon. Minister, that for the past 19 years, the death penalty has not been implemented. We have people who are murdering, for example, there is a lady who was murdered. In as much as the murderer was arrested, we know one way or the other he will be released from jail.
I recall again another example of someone who came from South Africa, he was drinking beer at a shopping centre, on his way home, a young boy followed this gentleman and murdered him for the simple reason that he alleged that each time he came to Zimbabwe, he was being so arrogant and too pompous. The boy was arrested and later released from jail, now he is living in the community.
I therefore agree with the motion that death penalty should be implemented. If I refer to the bible 2 Chronicles 7:14 that says; “those who are called by my name, if they pray together, I will turn my face to them and look upon them, however, they are supposed to desist from sinning and I will have mercy on them. I will give them their livestock for them to farm, only if they live in peace’
You will realise, because of death, there are so many things that have changed. There are people who are murdered when they do not deserve that. When you look at our chiefs, we know that it is a fact that they know we are all referring to these because of people who are not following our traditions. They murder whoever they feel like, when we refer to the bible, you will realise that God is condemning killing of people. Hence, the reason why I am saying death penalty should be abolished.
I know there is a place in Gokwe where they normally refer to a custom where they say Ngozi when you kill someone, they would return for revenge by causing death in the family that killed the deceased. There is a family whom their relative got murdered and he spent the whole year in the mortuary seeking the murderers to reveal themselves so that he could be buried.
If we could ask the Hon. Minister to say he is supposed to maybe have a certain amount allocated to his ministry to give to people to stop murdering others, we are all agreeing that the death penalty should be abolished. However, our nation is faced with murderers who kill – some because of hatred, sometimes someone is killed because of politics.
The question that I would pose to this House is; is there any wild animal that would come and assassinate someone? This is only an act of a human being. If only we can put measures to apprehend those murderers, maybe a way forward would be adding more years to life sentences in jail rather than asking someone to be given a death penalty. 50 years in jail is as good as the death penalty. We know there are so many people who are causing murder and they were not given death penalty. The Minister should come up with a law that will punish such people. We should come up with a better law, maybe increase the life sentence in jail rather than death penalty. I repeat once again that we should abolish the death penalty. Mr. President why is it that as a nation when we say out the truth, most of the time you realise that you will be assassinated? As a Member of this House, I also agree and support that we should abolish death penalty. We also need to put up good measures on those who are causing murder. I know from our rural areas, so many people are afraid to say out the truth because they know that the following day, they will be assassinated.
Mr. President Sir, I pray that we are supposed to follow all the laws that are put. It is my prayer that we will be touched by the Holy Spirit not to weaken our conscience. Those who are educated quote that anyone who is above 21 years or a lady is not supposed to be given death penalty. However, you realise that there are so many women who have committed murder, all those who are committing abortion, is that not killing someone? Also, another case is when someone is sent by a 70-year old to commit murder in our culture we refer to the one who would have sent that person to commit murder to be the one who would have actually committed the crime. I thank you Mr. President Sir.
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Mr. President Sir. Mr. President, first of all I want to thank the Hon. Senators by and large for supporting the Bill and for indicating that this was long overdue starting with Hon. Senator Tongogara. I just want to commend her, I think her speech was better than mine in trying to motivate for the passage of this Bill, full of factual information, statistics and everything was there. I want to commend her for a well-researched presentation that she made and she really made us proud here in Parliament. It was so articulate that I was very impressed and she reaffirmed the need for us to respect the right to life and the right to life being the cornerstone of our human rights.
Hon. Sibanda, presented a descending voice indicated passionately why we should spare those that bring us so much grief and pain when a murder has been done. I want to take her back to our culture that our ancestors, when something like this happened, they would not take their weapons of war and go to the village of the perpetrator and wipeout everyone. Rather they had ways which have been discussed by others of ensuring that was solved amicably with the dignity and the respect of life that was needed. Always in what we used to do, the deliberation would be towards conscientising our people that we must have the respect to life. In fact, they would say ropa harideurwe, you must not spill blood, so to speak.
I would want to commend, Hon. Sen. Chief for supporting the Bill after the descending voice, I think he did a very good job of culming down Hon. Sibanda after her emotional speech indicating that it is very difficult indeed to motivate after that speech and I agree. He largely spoke about our culture and he took us around the country to say that not even any culture be it from Shona people, Manyika, the Ndebele, the Kalanga - everyone is in agreement that in our African culture, this was not there but we need to come up with methods to ensure that we take away that spirit of murder from our people the same as Hon. Mavenyengwa, he was supporting it, quoting the Bible. Hon. Senator Mutsvangwa, summarised it to say that the Christmas gift that Senate can give His Excellency who has been an advocate of abolition of the death penalty is for this august House to pass the Bill.
Hon. Senator Chief Dr. Ngungubane gave us a view that is holistic from our culture to some case log from South Africa on how we should look at this and remove the death penalty. Hon. Sen. Ndlovu also gave an account and he supports the Bill so is Hon. Senator Phulu and lastly Hon. Senator Moyo. By and large Mr. President Sir, I want to thank all the Senators for the support rendered.
Lastly Mr. President Sir, allow me to thank Hon. Mushoriwa, the original mover of the Bill for having had the courage to initiate this while some of us were busy deliberating that should we or should we not. When Hon. Mushoriwa moved the Bill, His Excellency, the President said go and support that Bill, we want to ensure that we abolish the death penalty. Like what Hon. Senator Mutsvangwa said, the gift that we can give our Head of State is to ensure that we pass the Bill.
Having said that Mr. President, I now move that the Bill be now read a second time.
Motion put and agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Committee Stage: With leave, forthwith.
COMMITTEE STAGE
DEATH PENALTY ABOLITION BILL [H. B. 5A, 2024]
House in Committee.
Clauses 1 to 7 put and agreed to.
On Clause 8:
HON. SEN. PHULU: We welcome Clause 8 to the extent that it affords those whose sentences are being commuted, a right to appear before a court for resentencing. We also applaud the fact that these people are entitled to a lawyer. I wanted to suggest to the Minister that perhaps all those people be commuted, given that when they were trailed for murder, they were given pro deo representation. They should be given pro deo representation even during this process. That is my suggestion.
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Hon. Chair. I think that is the procedure because these are people who have a murder trial, so they are reappearing. So the same process is what we envisage will happen. We do not envisage that, we will require them to look for their own legal representation. These will be provided with legal representation but the only thing that we have is, we could not put it here. It is an administrative function that the Judicial Service Commission would then have to make sure that it is done, and I think it is a standard process. I am not sure why you specifically wanted that we put it to say that they must get a pro deo.
The Constitution sufficiently covers it, to say that at the state`s expense, anyone who requires legal representation should be provided with it. Hence you see that now we also are expanding our Legal Aid Directorate, but we are in conversation with law society, on how then we synchronise the pro deo lawyer, that law society will provide and the Legal Aid Directorate that we provide as a state to ensure that, those that require legal representation get it. I believe that your concerns are within the framework of what we are already working on but may not necessarily need to be included as a provision within the transitional provisions that we have put in here. I submit.
HON. SEN. PHULU: I want to comment on that, to simply say I accept what the Minister has said. In fact, yes, I had overlooked, I had forgotten that the Constitution pro deo representation is now in the Constitution, yet previously it was only in the Act, so, I consider. Thank you.
Clause 8 put and agreed to.
House resumed.
Bill reported without amendments.
Third Reading: With leave, forthwith.
THIRD READING
DEATH PENALTY ABOLITION BILL [H.B. 5A, 2024]
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Mr. President, I now move that the Bill be read the third time.
Motion put ant greed to.
Bill read the third time.
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Mr. President Sir. I just want to thank and congratulate the Senators for this historic occasion. Historic in the sense that this Bill was not originated from the Executive but from one of our Hon. Members who is not from the ruling party. It indicates that when it comes to national issues, we come together and put our heads together to do the correct thing.
I am also pleased to indicate that it is also historic in that His Excellency, when this Bill was gazetted, indicated to me that we need to support this Bill, bring a paper to Cabinet. We duly did that and it is historic in that being a man who was on death row himself, escaped death row by a technicality, understood how it felt to be on death row, supported the abolition of the death penalty. He has seen that vision of abolition of the death penalty being realised in his life time and it is a very early Christmas present that the Senate has given to our President.
I want to congratulate all of us and my last words, Mr. President, is that in deliberating national issues, let us continue in the spirit that has been exhibited when we passed the Death Penalty Abolition Bill, dissenting voices and those that supported but were united in wanting to ensure that we have laws that are for the good governance of all our people. I thank you Mr. President.
Having said that Mr. President, I do not want to remove the sweetener that we have just given ourselves by going into any other business. I move that the House do now adjourn.
On the motion of THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI), the House adjourned at a Quarter past Five o’clock p.m.